Brook Smith without a Punch and Rivet tool.

[doggeface]

As the stores are oos of this weapon and point work will call up conventional drilling what is the best size drill (mm) for good results?

Whilst I am at it , what do the Templot adherents find benefits them most from it's use? It is evident that the rigid use of standard radius curves quickly becomes similar to playing with my O gauge Hornby in 1944 but surely a choice of minimum radius and a check template to ensure that the minimum is not exceeded. Equally the careful use of templates to produce curves and a straight edge to determine the tangents (and a template to make the transition, this being suitable for any curves except the really generous ones which in my view do not need transition). Of course I am not considering the latest ideas in which the background scenarios can be plotted -- this mainly because having to work solo there is never time for such frippery outside the demands of escaped rivet seeking and wondering if the plan is correct!
Foolishly I sold off my Peter Smith Forest of Dean Railways for peanuts in 2006 and have now been obliged to pay €20 to replace it. It had been an ambition to model Lydney Junction to Coleford so the Coleford platform and sidings was a reversal point and the system could then climb that very steep incline and even incorporate the Milkwall siding and the start of the GW down to the Wye. Of course my passenger traffic will not have ceased in 1916 and continued for another 50 years! I lived a while in that area and these days the Flour Mill has taken on a new lease of railway life. I reckon that there was a track to it from the Princess Royal Pit at Brean ( could have been a tramway). The Mineral Loop from Pillowell / Whitecroft would fit in nicely disappearing into a tunnel (as it does). This most have been almost unique as a one way road!
Staying with Templot -- does it handle the vertical plane? One of my over enthusiasms gives rise to excessive gradients in the short term and then days of putting it right.

[Tim V]

As the stores are oos of this weapon and point work will call up conventional drilling what is the best size drill (mm) for good results?

1mm from memory.

Foolishly I sold off my Peter Smith Forest of Dean Railways for peanuts in 2006 and have now been obliged to pay €20 to replace it. It had been an ambition to model Lydney Junction to Coleford so the Coleford platform and sidings was a reversal point and the system could then climb that very steep incline and even incorporate the Milkwall siding and the start of the GW down to the Wye. Of course my passenger traffic will not have ceased in 1916 and continued for another 50 years! I lived a while in that area and these days the Flour Mill has taken on a new lease of railway life. I reckon that there was a track to it from the Princess Royal Pit at Brean ( could have been a tramway). The Mineral Loop from Pillowell / Whitecroft would fit in nicely disappearing into a tunnel (as it does). This most have been almost unique as a one way road!

The Peter Smith book has been superseded by the much better Wild Swan trilogy.

[Paul Willis]

As the stores are oos of this weapon and point work will call up conventional drilling what is the best size drill (mm) for good results?

IMNSHO, anyone attempting to build Brooke-Smith track by drilling the holes is heading towards insanity even faster than normal, if not already there.

So in an effort to keep our members on the right side of the asylum wall, would you like to borrow my punch? It doesn't have (has never had...) the closing attachment so I just bang the ends over using a reversed centre punch (a cheap one!) and a hammer.

Drop me a PM with your address on and I'll stick it in the post when I'm back in the country some time next week.

I'm not likely to be using it in the foreseeable future as for any new-build track I'm firmly sold on using the P4TrackCo stuff (no connection, etc), as it's so much quicker and easier for all but the most complex formations.

But that may indeed be what you're attempting, so more power to your elbow, and good luck!

Cheers
Flymo

[frizby]

The Peter Smith book has been superseded by the much better Wild Swan trilogy.

It is now a quartet and promises to be a sextet

Vol 1 & 2 originally hardback (OOP). Currently reprinted in paperback
Vol3 hardback (OOP) and reasonably hard to find
Vol 4 hardback currently available
Vols 5 & 6 to follow

[grovenor-2685]

As the stores are oos of this weapon and point work will call up conventional drilling what is the best size drill (mm) for good results?

I would strongly suggest you take up Flymo's offer, but if you really must use a drill you can get the size by trying them in the hole in one of your prepunched sleepers, find one that's a good fit, should be around 1mm.
Then you will need to set up a drill stand with a guide fence so you can slide the ply strips along and all the holes will be central.
Regards
Keith

[doggeface]

PIC_1113.JPG

PIC_1105.JPG

I have accepted Flymo's very generous offer -- what a gentleman! I await with bated breath for the wherewithal to continue construction but the post is being very reluctant to bring things to my door at the moment although this morning brought one packet that took a mere 6 days from Maidstone unlike the weeks from Portugal and Canada!

Straight track assembly suddenly became much easier and then I ran out of sleepers! The next interesting move will be the B7 or 8 turnout. The sole thing not clear is the use of the etched slide plates - I really much reread the article. The reading of old S4 news etc is quite enlightening --- Jeremy Suter could nor recall ever having seen whitemetal functional chairs but I discovered that the stores ceased to stock them in 1991. This is like yesterday to me but it cannot be denied that 20 years have elapsed!(I retired in 1992).

Meanwhile demolition is well underway and has provided new clean surfaces to try out my marking out by template and straight edge with transitions. The freeing up of space is giving me ideas of how to use the OO system as a working template for my planned 1883 arrangement whilst keeping something working - after all the work involved in track building and rolling stock conversion is quite significant when one is solo. I can then model the 1897 moment in reverse!

[Paul Willis]

Whilst I am at it , what do the Templot adherents find benefits them most from it's use? It is evident that the rigid use of standard radius curves quickly becomes similar to playing with my O gauge Hornby in 1944

I'm in no way an expert in Templot. I have a copy, and I try every so often to learn how to use it. It has a fiendishly difficult learning curve - it's not like any other piece of software I've experienced in its user interface, and the thought processes behind it.

That said, a browse of the Templot forum will show that there are people producing amazing results from it. There are also a number of very talented users of it on here, so it can be done, and I acknowledge that it's my deficiencies that cause the problem (damn it - having acknowledged that, I really must have another try at learning it again!).

But to answer your question, the key benefit of using it is the ability to recreate prototypical track designs that are fully featured and configured in whatever way you wish. Of course, that means that you get the benefit of infinitely flexible radii, transition curves, and by use of part templates can build almost any formation that you like. However all of this needs to be learned...

Indeed, as a modeller I find that there are a number of users for whom it seems that Templot has become the hobby in itself, rather like the users of train simulators, and it is not merely a tool to an end. It's a bit like being a lathe user that enjoys machining, but then throws away the bits that are (very skilfully) produced!

So yes, it is a useful tool, but not an easy one to learn, and even for the adherents they frequently admit that if they don't use it for a couple of months they've forgotten many of the features.

but surely a choice of minimum radius and a check template to ensure that the minimum is not exceeded. Equally the careful use of templates to produce curves and a straight edge to determine the tangents (and a template to make the transition, this being suitable for any curves except the really generous ones which in my view do not need transition).

And of course you are perfectly correct. I resort to paper, rulers and scissors every time that I get to a certain stage on Templot and get outside the limits of my basic knowledge! It is perfectly valid, and if it works for you then JFDI. Like so much in P4 modelling, there is not, and never has been "one true way"

Staying with Templot -- does it handle the vertical plane? One of my over enthusiasms gives rise to excessive gradients in the short term and then days of putting it right.

I don't believe that it does. I may be wrong, and would be happy for one of the real experts to correct me.

However even with a relatively steep slope, I'm sure that you could do what a real PW gang would do, and faced with a place where standard timbering doesn't fit, just give a timber or two a bit of a shove!

HTH
Flymo

[doggeface]

Hi Flymo, thanks for your views on this subject. I can recall passing a lot of hours trying this out some 10 years ago. At that time it was like having to learn CAD, Wordstar and Braille simultaneously ! I find that non user friendly programs are not for me. After some 50 years in that game (I "owned" a digital computer in 1963 when almost everything else was Analogue) it distresses me to have to waste my life reading for yet another PhD in button pressing and cussing.
I suppose that one can give a 0-4-0T a home to justify the tighter little areas (in my case maybe I could find room for Lydney Docks railway (it crossed the Main onthe level at 90° so would justify a unique device of consecutive 90° crossings.
I must admit to a little antipathy when the Templot Forum uttered wisdoms like popping out for an A2 or A3 printer! I learned to hate printers when the Navy abandoned books for a retrieval system with printer only to find that the Civil Service pillocks had not used the same scale for consecutive drawings but had used the "best fit" option. Neither was it possible to update or insert local mods or even to guarantee that it would print that demanded properly!
Still, many thanks for making me laugh -- throw away the work when finished indeed!! That really does capture the truth in some cases.


Peter

[grovenor-2685]

We managed perfectly well without Templot for many years, the P4 Manual gives plenty of examples on how to use the paper templates to produce curved points, Y points etc. and its not really hard. For more complex formations I used to produce templates on tracing paper by selectively tracing prts of the printed templates. So if you are not into the computer thing then give Templot a miss.
That said, Templot is really extremely simple and quick at producing templates to build track on with accurate radii and transitions etc.
All the learning curve problems come when you try to extend its use to plan the whole layout, and get into the multiple partial templates for more complex formations. Much of this is not needed if you just want to build on the plan, its only needed when you want pixel perfect drawings to pin on the wall, ie when Templot becomes the hobby.
Keith

PS I'm working on and off on the photos I took of my last turnout build, should be able to post them in a few days.

[Paul Willis]

That said, Templot is really extremely simple and quick at producing templates to build track on with accurate radii and transitions etc.
All the learning curve problems come when you try to extend its use to plan the whole layout

Keith is absolutely bang-on with this.

Templot is a brilliant tool for producing plain track, or standard turnouts or crossovers. They can be to any length or curvature that you wish. Even I can happily produce a B12 crossover on a curve, and then print off the template to use on the bench.

It is only when you try to link up the various pieces together and produce an entire flowing track plan that the learning curve (for me) goes from gentle slope to almost vertical! Try as I might, I still can't find the command that gives "join end of shape A to end of shape B"

Flymo

[LesGros]

Flymo wrote...

Try as I might, I still can't find the command that gives "join end of shape A to end of shape B"

Paul,
I had trouble with this too, All the info is on the templot website, but I found it a bit confusing at first reading. Then I read again about " Peg" and "Notch". It is a multi stage process for which I am now attempting to write a "pilot checklist" style, step by step aide memoire, when it is done I will send you a copy to try.

The latest, under development, release is shaping up to be a friendlier and more versatile product, but as Martin Wynne has written, it takes longer to write user guides than code the software.

Fot Peter,
The Templot forum is well worth a visit. Even if you do not ultimatly purchase a licence, there is much valuable information, including pictures, about prototype track formations.

[Alan Turner]

If the templates are not automaticaly joining then you have disabled F7 somehow. It can be reinstated by Action/F7 Snap Options/Snap on Background Templates.

By the way TEMPLOT shouldn't really be used like that. I know AnyRail does that but that's because its using toy track. TEMPLOT is best used by establishing the geometry of the track and then inserting the turnouts into it. That way you get flowing trackwork.

Alan

[wally]

The easy way with Templot is the initial cheat, the first thing you see is a turnout, just turn this into plain track with the relevant menu, setting panel lengths and sleeper spacings now to be the standard for all further work, then extend and curve this line as required to form the main line spine of the track plan. Once satisified with that (it need not be perfect at this stage) insert a turnout using the menu,alter handing and direction as required and move it along the track to the required position. Now "make turnout road" and extend and curve that as before. keep on inserting turnouts and roads until you have the basic track layout you want. All will join up correctly as the machine has thought it is making one item.

Now and only now you can alter the angle and lengths of the turnouts individually without losing the continiuity.

Not the way Mr Wynne explains it, but it works for me and has made life easier for others I have spoken to.

H T H Wally

[doggeface]

Wally, I have read your remarks with great interest. The logic fits in with all my reading (£50 is not chicken feed chez nous!) to date. One question raises itself --- can you determine way points from an initial survey and generate a basic spine with a route which is not the shortest and most direct but still within the pre-demanded criteria? ( or does the operator have to bend and drag to generate the fundamental route form?)
Secondly -- if one has pegged the end of track point does this remain constant irrespective of changes to turnout type and size and again does the whole route reform after your changes or just the succeeding section?

Regards

Peter

[Alan Turner]

Peter,

you would benifit from joining th TEMPLOT Forum. http://85a.co.uk/forum/

Alan

[wally]

Pete,

A valid and sensible point there, which perhaps I should have elaborated on.

When extending or curving the plain track all adjustments are done using the peg as the base point, when you get to the place where you wish to alter the base radius just move the peg along the line to the desired position (I nearly wrote "point" there but thought that would be confusing), them "make split" to allow all further adjustmets to be effective from here. This can be, like the extend and insert turnout process, a gradual progression across the layout.

I suggest the same action as Alan Turner; get inolved in the Templot Forum but don't forget that many Templot users can be as focused on their subject as many on here are with their pet subjects.

Wally

[doggeface]

As recommended I have plunged into the templot world -- looking for the answers but to be honest , not finding it the easiest of forums to navigate except on the level of John Cabot -- jusy keep sailing west until you bump into something (like Canada).
Today saw the start of a turnout using only Brook - Smith rivets etc and slider plates where indicated. It is not at all clear just how the closure rails are treated in these conditions so they will be soldered to the rivets and hope that the switches have sufficient flexibility to operate under normal forces. I am also having problems finding the switch/stock rail clearance measurement when open.
I have chosen to commence the construction without the aid of a punch & closure tool and have drilled all the holes using the Dremel. By empirical methods I have determined the correct drill size as 1.2mm. (I cheated and measured the rivet diametre)!
All the same, the rivetting is proving easier than expected especially as I now employ a straight narrow pick from my pseudo dentists tool kit to pass through the sleeper and maintain the alignment and prevent escapers.
Up to the point where I put this into use several rivets had escaped -- one made it to Switzerland , two have disappeared (presumably being sheltered by hostile dirt and muck, two never made it off of the bench and two were recaptured from the floor.
Tomorrow will see the construction of the nose and a start on the blades - no one else will be home so cussing may be liberal!
So far I have inserted only one rivet upside down in a group of 4.

Peter

[craig_whilding]

http://www.scalefour.org/history/p4tracklaying.html gives details on using hair clips to do the gap setting but I agree the actual measurement suggested doesn't seem that easy to find! You basically want to be a bit over the check gauge at the end of the planing at the other end to the tip of the blades though; the ends of the blades will open further due to the way the blade flexes.

I think I aimed for something like 0.8mm at B on the ones i've done so far..

The GWR had a standard opening at the tip of 4"..

[grovenor-2685]

I agree the actual measurement suggested doesn't seem that easy to find!

It was then the philosophy that if you used the gauges you didn't have to measure anything, the opening at the blade tip is normally between 4 and 4.5 inches in UK practice. Generally if the blades have the correct number of slide chairs and are then fixed to gauge the natural bend will give you enough heel clearance when the tip opening is correct. I have never found the heel clearance to be a problem with A, B or C switches, but if you go in for F or G switches (or 30ft GWR) you may need to think about it.
My photos are now sorted and resized but won't get posted in time for your work tomorrow. However, there are a couple of pics of a vee jighere.
Regards
Keith

[doggeface]

PIC_1122.JPG

PIC_1119.JPG

PIC_1120.JPG

PIC_1121.JPG

PIC_1123.JPG

Well the anticipated progress on point construction has been made -- just one blade to go! The Digest 23.6.1 has been very useful as a basic guide but it almost had me when it came to not mentioning the slide plates (as an aide memoir). Reference is made to 23.6.2 with respect to tie bars but this subject does not feature in that digest. I am assuming that a length of long tie material fitted with a rivet for each blade will be functional and that decorative plastic tie bars would be then glued onto the working tie (any offers on a good supplier?) This repeated for as many ties as needed by the prototype.

Problems encountered: Having three rivets under the nose.
Hitting on the correct angle for the splice (even with a gauge)
Using the Gibson check rail gauge -- it seems to be at odds with the other gauges
Getting cocky when things have well for an hour or so!
Actions easier than expected:
Filing the rail.
Filing flats on rivet heads
Correcting mistakes in soldered work.

[craig_whilding]

I don't know of anyone using rivets in tie bars but someone might in a sort of sliding sleeper arrangement.

The Exactoscale method is wire from each blade (hooking under the stock rails to keep the blades from rising) passing vertically down through the board into tubes in a tie bar underneath a set distance apart. I think the given dimension by Exactoscale is a bit close however and something over 20mm apart is needed. The idea of the wire and tube is to allow pivoting rather than a direct solder connection that could fail.

Cosmetic plastic tie bar aren't available afaik, Exactoscale may have a design in the works but nothing available next.

Masokits do quite a finescale tie bar but its designed to be functional so is in brass with pcb isolation.

Checkrail gauge - be careful its not an EM or S4 one! The stores has sold the latter to people asking for a P4 one before and the same might be true of Alan Gibson at some stage. See what the package says.

[doggeface]

Thanks for the info Craig. I will have a look at the Masokits offering as I would like to employ the prototypical rodding through the rail to prevent blade lift -- probably 0.85mm brass. I have combined the blade and closure so I am wary of short circuit potential and will switch only the nose via the point motor auxiliaries.
I also wish to stay with surface mounted operating gear and electrics where ever possible as I have developed a strong distaste for grovelling!

[craig_whilding]

Thanks for the info Craig. I will have a look at the Masokits offering as I would like to employ the prototypical rodding through the rail to prevent blade lift -- probably 0.85mm brass. I have combined the blade and closure so I am wary of short circuit potential and will switch only the nose via the point motor auxiliaries.
I also wish to stay with surface mounted operating gear and electrics where ever possible as I have developed a strong distaste for grovelling!

Masokits tie bars are the later type of bar stretcher not the round rod type, C+L sell those.

[grovenor-2685]

PS I'm working on and off on the photos I took of my last turnout build, should be able to post them in a few days.

I've sorted the photos and got halfway through the notes to go with them. Rather than clutter up this topic I have added an extra page to my site.
Go to http://www.norgrove.me.uk/points.html
regards
Keith

[doggeface]

Well after a week of activity i have made up two off B6 l turnouts with veroboard tie bars (until the mail eventually turns up with some thing functional or cosmetic and also a few lengths of straight track. All is soldered awaiting cosmetic chairs and/or alterations. The first alignment problem has already shown up as the paper templates have sleeper spacing at a different rate to the 60ft GW straights so I shall have to do some interlacing and solder on the run! I am not keen to fix things down until I am a) happier with my work and b) convinced of my P4 planning! I have posted a couple of shots which show a 30 year old Hornby carriage with Gibson wheels which coasts through the cross over even though it is secured only with a few press studs! The next rewheel will be a Bachmann pannier for which I have the wheel set but it looks as if I will be obliged to make a quartering tool.